So can anyone explain what's just gone on there? chris baird booked twice in the same incident and walked... then the hungarian lad lashes out 2 mins later and only gets a yellow.
NI v Hungary
- Thread starter Paul_Jones
- Start date
Foul off the ball and then the kick out. 2 yellow card offences during the same passage of play. Ref spot on to send him off. In my opinion the second incident was a red on its own anyway. The Hungary player probably should of gone aswell however it was caused by the NI player who was provoking him. I think the ref got both right but I would of also booked the NI player
howard_webb
Well-Known Member
You don't see that everyday now !
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
WOW!!! Amazing!! I mean, there's nothing wrong with the decision at all, I completely support it - just amazed that any top-flight referee actually did some refereeing for a few minutes. IMO it was completely against conventional practice.
Refereeing is all about 'managing the game' and 'managing the players' and 'presenting the professional sport to the ticket-holders' and 'not being seen' and 'not upsetting anybody' and all this other crap that basically makes the LOTG utterly irrelevant and makes decision making more about which way will upset the fewest people rather than actually applying the LOTG. Players have no personal responsibility for their actions. None. Teams don't lose self control, referees lose control of the match and all that nonsense. It's an emotional game, blah blah.
Could you imagine if more refereeing was done in this 'you do the wrong thing, you get booked' fashion? 5 players mob the ref? 5 players get carded (I mean, how on earth does it make sense to say that 4 players are completely allowed to mob the ref, but one of them wasn't?). Imagine how many other areas such an approach would apply to - and imagine how much better our game is for it.
The fact that the public will be more worried about what the ref did ('he thinks it's all about him', 'he doesn't know how to control the players without reaching into his pocket', way way) than the fact that the player committed 2 very reckless tackles illustrates my point perfectly.
Unfortunately, that's 100% the mentality of the game. Zero personal responsibility for their own actions. He shouldn't HAVE to know he was being booked. Commit 2 offences, get booked twice. It SHOULD be that simple. But it isn't.
Refereeing is all about 'managing the game' and 'managing the players' and 'presenting the professional sport to the ticket-holders' and 'not being seen' and 'not upsetting anybody' and all this other crap that basically makes the LOTG utterly irrelevant and makes decision making more about which way will upset the fewest people rather than actually applying the LOTG. Players have no personal responsibility for their actions. None. Teams don't lose self control, referees lose control of the match and all that nonsense. It's an emotional game, blah blah.
Could you imagine if more refereeing was done in this 'you do the wrong thing, you get booked' fashion? 5 players mob the ref? 5 players get carded (I mean, how on earth does it make sense to say that 4 players are completely allowed to mob the ref, but one of them wasn't?). Imagine how many other areas such an approach would apply to - and imagine how much better our game is for it.
The fact that the public will be more worried about what the ref did ('he thinks it's all about him', 'he doesn't know how to control the players without reaching into his pocket', way way) than the fact that the player committed 2 very reckless tackles illustrates my point perfectly.
"Chris would not have made the second tackle if he knew he was being booked for the first," said the Northern Ireland manager.
Unfortunately, that's 100% the mentality of the game. Zero personal responsibility for their own actions. He shouldn't HAVE to know he was being booked. Commit 2 offences, get booked twice. It SHOULD be that simple. But it isn't.
Mooseybaby
Retired big bad baldy in all black!
There's something you don't see very often. Well done that ref! 
Ok, fair point - no obvious advantage signal. I've just viewed the clip again and I'd be going for a straight red for the second challenge. He just kicks his opponent around the knees. Anyone agree or disagree?
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
I'm not convinced that had enough force for a straight red at this level, but particularly at grassroots level a red could be an option.
If it's orange, and he's already sitting on a yellow, then that fact could influence the decision 'down' (only if it could go either way though).
If it's orange, and he's already sitting on a yellow, then that fact could influence the decision 'down' (only if it could go either way though).
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Obviously impossible to know if he shouted anything to let the player know, but one thing that might have helped 'sell' this decision would have been a clear 'point' by the ref to the location of the first incident to register that he'd seen it and would be taking action at the next break in play. I certainly wouldn't argue with either decision and as others have said, you could make a case for a straight red for each incident alone!
This is international football. With 6 officials. One of them saw the first offense, not the referee.
As referee on our games none of us will see the first offense and if we do, we would stop play then and there as its off the ball and deal with it as we see it.
This will never happen for most of us, unless an assistant see's it, which again is very unlikely. All that would happen for us is that we'd see the second offense, pull out a caution and happily referee the rest of the game. A player may say he got kicked off the ball, ask who by and say I'll keep a watch out sorry I can't see behind my back.
Ideally even at this level you'd want to stop the game on the first offense using the mic's and deal with the first offense, not have the issue they had in the match with the double caution and everyone having to wait to go home to have a clue what happened, with even the people watching on TV not really having a clue.
As referee on our games none of us will see the first offense and if we do, we would stop play then and there as its off the ball and deal with it as we see it.
This will never happen for most of us, unless an assistant see's it, which again is very unlikely. All that would happen for us is that we'd see the second offense, pull out a caution and happily referee the rest of the game. A player may say he got kicked off the ball, ask who by and say I'll keep a watch out sorry I can't see behind my back.
Ideally even at this level you'd want to stop the game on the first offense using the mic's and deal with the first offense, not have the issue they had in the match with the double caution and everyone having to wait to go home to have a clue what happened, with even the people watching on TV not really having a clue.
Having watched the replay about a million more times I am started to feel that the first offence could possibly have been a red aswell? Can't tell exactly what has happened due to camera angle and video quality but it looks to me like he has either struck him in the back or kicked him over?
The video is not clear, but it does look like an off the ball incident, and if so I can see no other decision than a red
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Looks like the ref wasn't looking straight at it so the AR might have phoned it in.
Either one could be a red for me. Excellent refereeing.
Interesting point about warning during play that the card is coming - very hard to do in a noisy stadium.
It would be good if there was a signal for that (hand on chest pocket?) while waiting for the next break
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
That's a fair point....in a scenario like this, if it's at least orange, a straight red would be a bit easier.